Case law

TENANTS' DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION & Another v. AMTAX HOLDINGS 227, LLC, & Others

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jan 13, 2025

"Qualified low-income housing projects" are those where a "qualified nonprofit organization[4] . . . own[s] an interest in the project (directly or through a partnership) and materially participate[s] . . . in the development … Where the partnership agreement clearly reflects the parties' intention that TDC have an unconditioned right to exercise its right of first refusal in accordance with the terms of the ROR agreement and consistent with the

Commissioners on Inland Fisheries v. Holyoke Water Power Co.

104 Mass. 446 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 15, 1870

The rights of the public are therefore not to be presumed to have been surrendered to a corporation, except so far as an intention to surrender them clearly appears in the charter. … In the light of the principles thus established, we proceed to examine more particularly the provisions of the charter of the Hadley Falls Company.

United States v. Cafiero

242 F. Supp. 2d 49 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 28, 2003

Significantly, the McKenzie decision closed by noting, “[w]e decline to immunize international travelers who choose to pass through this country, however, briefly.” 818 F.2d 115 at 119 . (emphasis added). … It maintains that the American authorities clearly had probable cause as to both state and federal crimes when Cafiero was taken to the police barracks, and thus the cocaine retrieved from his person is therefore admissible

Home Owners Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Northwestern Fire & Marine Insurance

354 Mass. 448 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jun 7, 1968

Northwestern claims exceptions to certain rulings of the trial judge and to his action in denying certain requests and qualifying his allowance of others. Northwestern filed an outline bill of exceptions. … The court in the Giedrewicz case finally concluded on the facts before it that “if it is clearly established, in the trial of an action either against the employee or against -the principal for damages caused by the employee

Opinion of the Justices to the Governor & Council

307 Mass. 613 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 18, 1940

And while the office of judge of the Superior Court is clearly within the class of offices therein described, a position on a local board or on an appeal board under the Act now in question is not within that class of offices … Ed.] c. 212, §§ 1, 2) there are other judges qualified to hear the case. See, as to the special duties of the chief justice, G. L. (Ter.

Russell Block Associates v. Board of Assessors of Worcester

88 Mass. App. Ct. 351 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Sep 16, 2015

Turning to the merits, the primary question in dispute is whether the garage qualified in part for residential classification. See G. … They are archetypical decisions of legislatures that, when expressed clearly, should not -- really cannot -- be subject to judicial second guessing.

Springfield Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. Friele

304 Mass. 224 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Oct 27, 1939

Choate, 146 Mass. 395, 398 ; where the intention of the testator in regard to conditions “now existing” did not clearly appear and the trust was terminated in part, Williams v. … Williams, 268 Mass. 275 , one article of the will in question that established a trust read as follows: “Upon the decease of all the annuitants herein mentioned, ...

Ronald Goldman & 27 Other Taxpayers v. Secretary of the Executive Office of Health and Human Services

Massachusetts Superior Court · Jun 3, 2021

To determine whether the Legislature had created a private right of action to enforce this duty, and thereby waived the Commonwealth’s sovereign immunity, the SJC considered “whether it would be reasonable as a matter of … Here, by contrast, the Plaintiffs have clearly set forth allegations that do establish that MassHealth is expending taxpayer funds to cover a particular physician service without determining whether it was medically necessary

Commonwealth v. Kartell

58 Mass. App. Ct. 428 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Jun 30, 2003

[that it] tend[ed] to qualify, characterize or explain the underlying event,” i.e., the shooting. … This well-established rule is rooted in the constitutional principle that “criminal defendants [are guaranteed] ‘a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.’ ” Crane v.

Commonwealth v. Flynn

285 Mass. 136 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jan 6, 1934

The opinion goes on to say that the court would be inclined to follow that conclusion if the question were an open one in Virginia and if the court did not feel that such course would contravene the established statutory … The primary object of these statutes has not been to confer a benefit on individuals or to give them rights or immunities with reference to another man’s dog.

Commonwealth v. Shagoury

6 Mass. App. Ct. 584 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Sep 12, 1978

The judge may within his discretion admit a nonex-pert’s testimony on the value of an item once he has found that the witness is qualified so to testify due to his familiarity, knowledge and experience with the item. … The judge’s conclusion that Saunders was so qualified was not clearly erroneous, and he properly admitted Saunders’s testimony, leaving its weight to be determined by the jury. See Rubin v.

Mercado v. Department of Social Services

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 15, 2023

Additionally, the Court explained that the defendant social worker and attorney are immune from suit for damages in their official capacities; the defendant agency has immunity … Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11 (1991) (per curiam ) (“[J]udicial immunity is an immunity from suit, not just from the ultimate assessment of damage.”).

Western Rail Road v. Babcock

47 Mass. 346 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Sep 15, 1843

But, to establish either of these grounds of defence, the burden of proof is plainly on the defendant; and to bring his case within the former, he must show such mistake on his part, or some misrepresentation on that of the … But a more decisive, and perhaps more satisfactory answer is, vhat the direct stipulation of the defendant was to execute a qualified, defeasible conveyance of the land to the company, on certain payments being made.

Commonwealth v. Fuller

423 Mass. 216 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jul 17, 1996

By its terms, the privilege clearly promotes two important interests. … In addition, because the records at issue in Bishop were protected by a qualified, as opposed to an absolute, privilege, see Commonwealth v.

Commonwealth v. Maltais

387 Mass. 79 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Aug 4, 1982

The Commonwealth introduced sufficient evidence to allow the trial judge to conclude that the witness in question was qualified. 6 The witness clearly possessed “sufficient skill, knowledge or experience in the field of his … The Commonwealth clearly demonstrated the chain of custody.

Hanover Insurance v. Rapo & Jepsen Insurance Services, Inc.

449 Mass. 609 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Aug 3, 2007

timing and setting of the communications are important indicators of the measure of common interest; the shared interest necessary to justify extending the privilege to encompass intercorporate communications appears most clearly … Where defendants allege a common interest that is no more than a joint effort to establish a common litigation defense strategy, the requisite common interest is among the easiest to establish.

In re Boston Children's Service Ass'n

20 Mass. App. Ct. 566 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Aug 12, 1985

Gean’s advice), that there be a clearly identifiable caretaker. The mother was awaiting trial on a capital offense, and her continued availability was uncertain. … That was before the father succeeded in establishing a home.

Messere v. Fair

752 F. Supp. 48 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 8, 1990

In no such case' is a showing of prejudice— or alternatively stated a showing of actual injury — a necessary element for establishing liability. … Here, the fine shadings of the spectrum need not be delineated, as the failure of the state to provide services to Messere falls clearly in the unconstitutional range.

Commonwealth v. Medina

81 Mass. App. Ct. 525 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Apr 4, 2012

The defendant argues that only a properly qualified expert is competent to give such testimony and that its erroneous admission created a substantial risk of a miscarriage of justice. … The jury would not have applied this instruction to the defendant’s recorded statement where he clearly did not testify at trial.

Firearms Records Bureau v. Simkin

466 Mass. 168 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Aug 8, 2013

the applicable dis-qualifiers is hardly conclusive evidence that § 131F was intended to create a free-standing nonresident licensing scheme. … Further, the limits of unsuitability have not been clearly established by our case law.